Saturday, January 12, 2008

Some of you may have heard about the conspiracy theories involving "voter fraud" in New Hampshire. Basically, an election worker makes a simple mistake, and the Paultards freak out. It's amazing how they can easily forgive Ron Paul for decades of racist newsletter articles, but one volunteer worker makes an inconsequential mistake about Ron Paul, and suddenly there's hell to pay. The Concord Monitor reports the story:

The assault picked up after lunch. Paul supporters phoning Call claimed to be from the media. Others just yelled, saying she had committed treason, fraud. One person said she should be shot. She received as many as 40 calls that day.

"One person said he was on a nationally syndicated radio station," Call said, "and he has given out my phone number and they need to call the town of Sutton to find out why there's voter fraud."

The voices came from everywhere. California. Ohio. Florida. Michigan. Very few were from New Hampshire.

A man from Texas e-mailed that he was "contacting, by certified mail, the Attorney General of New Hampshire . . . and requesting a complete investigation and prosecution of any and all parties involved."

A police dispatcher in New London said yesterday she'd received inquiries about the clerk's office phone.

Call got a handful of calls that night at home, refusing to pick up whenever an out-of-state number appeared on her screen.

this really only begs one question, If Jennifer Call didn't write the wrong vote down, then:WHO WROTE DOWN THE WRONG VOTE?

gimmie a nameUntil she fesses up who forged the wrong tally for Paul, then she deserves every single little damn bit of hell she receives. Give her Hell till she Confesses who it was that forged the wrong tally. Dont dare let her weasel out with a plea for pity!

what kinda idiots do they have running the voting there if they cant properly record a number from one peice of paper to another. i mean a 7 year old could do that. = clearly indicates fraud, and they thought they could slide with it. Look to the person that Actually wrote the Zero vote down for Paul. THAT guy is the criminal here.

9
comments:

Anonymous
said...

I don't understand why you guys are so tough on poor Ron Paul. He is clearly a troll that is involved in the epic trolling of a major political party for the lulz. He just says crazy shit to cause controversy.

While I think his racist stuff is pretty funny, Ron Paul needs to do something even more outrageous to keep his fanbase involved. Perhaps claiming Jews did WTC (like most of his fanbase claims) would achieve major lulz. At that point, the mainstream media might give him the banhammer, tho.

And of course, I'm sure you know of the conspiracy theory that "they" (Bilderbergers, the NWO, neocons, socialists, who knows?) plan to assassinate RP. The way the Paultards reacted to that, you'd think they'd be the ones to pull the trigger just to start their eagerly-anticipated "revolution."

Interesting that you should say that, Beth, because the dude that spilled the beans on the assassination discussion in the Bilderberg circle is a friendly/concerned member of the CFR. And the guy who received this info and reported it to the Paultards is a highly respected Spanish author whose book is an international bestseller published in 24 languages.

I heard the interview with my own ears. I am sorry to report a real basis for the rumor. Obviously I really WISH it had been completely made up, because the whole thing is very unnerving.

If RP were not a threat to the Establishment the media wouldn't be blackballing him. They would put a microphone in front of his mug and let him bury himself. But they don't dare: When given enough time to explain his positions, Ron Paul makes total sense. He's received over 100,000 endorsements from bigwigs in academia, business, science, finance, media, and economics, all of whom say RP is "dead on" in his assessments of the economy and the state of human and civil rights in the U.S.

Ut's funny how Paultards feel compelled to lie and flat out make things up. 100,000 endorsements? Really? And all of them from bigwigs?

Please name them. All of them. And show us their credentials. Because apparently, despite all these bigwig endorsements Ron Paul supposedly have, none of them appear on his website. His list of academics only includes a few dozen people, most of whom come from the Austrian school (which isn't even taken seriously in Austria), and none of whome seem to have any notable accomplishments or awards. So what exactly makes them a "bigwig?"

I just haven't found the "original" source yet. I did discover the methodology of ONE counter though:

"I only searched the entire repository of human knowledge for the phrase "endorses x" for each of the candidates. I consider reference to an endorsement as an endorsement by the referrer."

So it looks like a webcrawl datagathering exercise for ALL candidates and RP came out on top (Romney only got about 30K).

Not scientific, but interesting nonetheless. They probably don't all qualify as "bigwigs" so I take that part of my claim back. But if I were to define "bigwig" it would be a community leader of whatever sort, I'm not picky. Regardless of their official "status" they're votes. Yay . . .

I had a lightbulb moment here: The folks on the endorsement list on the RP website don't appear to be the frothing-at-the-mouth nutso types. I think the stereotype of the "typical" RP supporter is skewed by the occasional out-of-control blogger who does the RP campaign no favors. As for moi, I'm educated, a high-income professional, 41 years old, mom, homeowner. Not exactly nuts. Except in a good way I mean.

(PS: When you hold the other candidates to the same standard as you do to RP I'll accept that you're not a paid shill for Ms. Clinton, who can't hold a candle to Dr. Paul, morally speaking)